James v. Penn Tanning Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 319, Jan. T., 1907, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Warren Co., June T., 1904, No. 18, on verdict for plaintiffs in case of H. J. James and T. S. James, trading as James Brothers now for use of James Brothers Lumber Company, v. Penn Tanning Company. Assumpsit on an alleged contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 319, Jan. T., 1907, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Warren Co., June T., 1904, No. 18, on verdict for plaintiffs in case of H. J. James and T. S. James, trading as James Brothers now for use of James Brothers Lumber Company, v. Penn Tanning Company. Assumpsit on an alleged contract. The writing or memorandum in controversy was in the following form: “H J James of James Bros was here on Jay 21, ’95 I told him that we would pay 5.75 pr 2200 lbs for Bark Loaded on P & W Jo Jo Jnct fr 1895 Peeling Somewhere about 3000 to 4000 Cord that we would pay them 4.00 pr Cord & the timber…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Elkin,
This is an action of assumpsit to recover for the breach of an alleged contract for the sale or exchange of hemlock timber and bark. The defendant corporation is extensively engaged in the operation of tanneries, ánd the legal plaintiffs were, and the use plaintiff is, engaged in the lumber business. The tanning company needed bark and the lumber people wanted to sell bark, and perhaps purchase timber. This was the situation of the parties at the time negotiations began about the subject-matter of this controversy. Crary was the president of the Penn Tanning…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Cohen v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Estate of ConnorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924